K didn’t know that he was going to punt until he had Duncan…and Wallace….and then saw Shaq still sitting there. When he took Ray it was a bona fide fine decision…and the subsequent events don’t undermine that decision. If he had planned all along to punt, then your argument makes more sense–but you can’t retroactively reduce Ray’s value. At the time the choice was made, Ray was clearly the best on the board. And, regardless of the ESPN rate reduction, Ray still contributes such dominance in 3s that he remains–at the end of the day, after the Duncan, Wallace, Shaq selections–more strategically valuable than Kidd or Paul (or Nash, or or or).

Ray’s multi-cat value illustrates the circumstances under which I might keep closers, even if I were punting Saves: they’ll deliver fairly high k/bb, great ERA and WHIP (and will fit in under innings limits, which certainly prevent an all SP lineup). There may be other middle relievers who offer similar values–like there may be other gunners who get 3s, 25 ppg, and 4/4 rpg/apg (Joe Johnson?)–but there isn’t anything wrong with holding on to (or finding a way to trade for full replacement value) a Ray Ray or K-Rod, even if I’m punting a category that they contribute to.

Your point is well taken: in a transaction-cost free, fluid market, I’d “convert” every last bit of value. But, it’s not a fully fluid market, and the inefficiency of “not-reaping” Ray’s FT value is well counter-balanced by his unequalled 3s, ppg, and unusually high combo of rpg/apg.

Love the site. Obviously.

Just like in baseball, say you’re punting saves - why, then, would you have any closers on your team? Why not trade them for a starter that will provide you more wins and k’s? the saves they get will have zero value for your squad, a 1 in a category is a 1 whether you are JUST behind secon-worst or WAY behind them.

The same holds true for basketball. Allen has a first-round value IF you count free throws. But if you’re punting free throws, whatever benefit he has in FT% is irrelevent to your team. Look at it this way. Take a look at the ESPN average player rater from last year, where allen is 12th with a 6.12 overall. But now, take his FT% value (1.61) and make it a 0.00, because that’s how much value it’s giving your squad. now, he’s at 4.51 overall, putting him at 17 overall just behing Jason Kidd but ahead of Chris Paul. Pretty significant difference, right? That’s not first-round value for Team K anymore.

I recall reading the punt article–it’s a smart summary of good strategy. But your key point is “the sooner you decide to punt, the more likely you’ll be at succeeding in reaping the benefits.” In that draft, with each incremental addition of a top-quality contributor–first Duncan, then Wallace–it became clear (but not certain) that K wasn’t gonna win full-points in FT%, even with Ray. That doesn’t retroactively make Ray a bad pick–it just means that Ray’s FT% now becomes somewhat dispensable to K’s strategy.

But that doesn’t make Ray overpriced in the first round–K wasn’t paying for the FT% dividend only. K could’ve taken Nash, and given up some 3s and some boards in exchange for apg, or Paul and given up some points and all 3s, or or or. But he took Ray presumably because of his absurd 3s, top-tier 25 ppg, and nice package of 4/4 reb/ast.

When you combine the fact that FT% was already at risk (b/c of Duncan and GW) with a view of who else was on the board when K took Shaq, the emergent decision to punt becomes even more compelling. Still available were Bogut, West, Cvill (though Murphy would’ve made for some interesting alternative strategy)…none of them would pair with Duncan and Wallace to achieve the kind of category dominance in Points, FG%, Rebs, Blks that Shaq delivers to K at that point in the draft. And remember: even WITHOUT Shaq, K would struggle to win FT because of TD and GW.

Acknowledging the likelihood of FT struggles, then deciding to make it an irrelevant certainty outweighed by other dominance, isn’t bad strategy at all. It’s reactive. It’s “the sooner you decide to punt, the more likely you’ll be at succeeding in reaping the benefits.”

The mark of a good team usually is indicated by the fact that they produce high TO numbers. It helps make the parity in leagues, especially Roto, more bearable.

I lost TOs nearly every week last year but still won my league due to my overall production.

take a look at this post I did last year about how to go about punting a category: http://www.fantasybasketblog.net/2006/01/31/how-to-block-punts/

so while at this point punting ft% is an option for Team K, in order to do it right he’s got to trade Ray Allen. And if you’re looking to trade your first round pick before your draft is even finished, I don’t think you can say you drafted very well.

In addition, as general strategy, you take best available at your draft spot and build on it. I think it’s a little unreasonable to assume that he “knew he’d be taking Shaq in the later rounds.” I assume that Team K didn’t plan to punt at the time he drafted Allen–but when he got Duncan in the second (oh how he’s slipped) and Gerald in the third, I gather he realized that FT% wasn’t something he was gonna win, even with Ray’s 90+%. So why not punt that category and achieve dominance in three others?

Overall, maybe I see him going in the next round, but I would much rather take someone with more emphasis in the defensive categories or a Caron Butler/Shane Battier is at all available.

I’m looking at both of those guys to be great “sleepers”, in that hopefully one or both of them will slip a bit.

With H2H leagues, you may lose that category almost every week, but you’ll certainly win it every once in a wihle when those guys, that usually hurt you, shoot the ball well. It works the same way with FG%.

In an H2H league, you have to go after production…whoever puts the most numbers on the board; this is often tied into the player’s playing time, so I’d monitor that as well, especially with the later picks in the draft.

I don’t like the idea of punting categories, but it is certainly a viable strategy that can work in the right situation.

Preservation of greatness team F!